Updated: December 27, 2012
In the time it took me to write that title, 20 new posts tagged #Instagram appeared on Twitter. If you’ve ever wanted to watch a PR nightmare unfold before your eyes in real time, now’s your chance.
Even if you don’t use Instagram yourself, you probably know about their new terms of service, which include this passage:
“To help us deliver interesting paid or sponsored content or promotions, you agree that a business or other entity may pay us to display your username, likeness, photos (along with any associated metadata), and/or actions you take, in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you.”
The Twitter posts surrounding this change (60 more since I last looked) are almost unilaterally outraged vows to delete accounts. Several media outlets are predicting the end of the photo-sharing service, and while Instagram isn’t the first social network to fall out of favor, it’s the first one to go out with this level of backlash. Why? Because they underestimated consumers.
Consumers know that they’re a commodity, but they still demand respect
Among all the furious postings (another 49 now) are people repeating the well-known adage, “If you aren’t buying something, you’re the product being sold.” In marketing we’ve known this is the case forever, but the fact is that today’s consumers know it, too. They’re even OK with it . . . to a point. Looks like Instagram has found that point.
The thing is, Instagram might have even been able to pull it off. It’s not having their pictures used in advertising that most users are finding problematic. It’s that they have no control over how and when those images are used, and they get no credit for photos they’ve taken. Because, yes, even that photo of someone’s lunch is intellectual property.
They also take issue with the approach. For one, when Instagram announced the change on their official blog, the post contained the phrase, “Nothing has changed about your photos’ ownership or who can see them.”
Then, they proceeded to negate that statement within the policy. Perhaps they feel that what they are saying is technically correct, but from the consumer perspective they couldn’t be more wrong. If the users truly retain ownership of those photos, then they have a right to say what is done with their property. Instagram is planning to remove that right. The way users see it, Instagram was hoping they wouldn’t read the fine print. They didn’t realize that consumers know they are a commodity. They protect themselves by always reading the fine print.
So what are the lessons for online marketers?
Simple: don’t lie, don’t steal, and treat consumers with respect. The days when marketing involved twisting words and utilizing sneak-attacks are long gone. The currency these days is honesty and openness.
Perhaps Instagram should have said, “we need to be profitable to continue providing this service, and the most feasible way to do this is to allow advertisers access to your images. You may opt out for your entire account or only for specific images, and in all cases may choose to only allow images to be used with a photo credit attached.” Maybe if they’d done that the response would have been more positive. People understand that businesses have to make money. They are perfectly willing to be part of the machine, just as long as the machine doesn’t lie to them.
140 more posts on Twitter, and they keep flooding in. Let’s all take care to learn these lessons now, while they are happening at someone else’s expense.